The number of gun deaths in America is simply too huge when compared to all other developed countries. To believe that access to guns does not affect this disparity is to believe that Americans are far more violent than other countries, and I cannot believe that.

The sky turns pink and mauve, and the world gradually becomes visible: rustling grass and waving roseau cane, water like a mirror.

There is a flapping noise up high, off to our right; there is a whispered word of excitement; and then a rush as we stand up and level our shotguns, and the retort of the guns shatters the quiet.

I remember my senses kicking into overdrive: a thud and a cracking of cane, and a barking hunting dog hurtling out, striding through the marsh water to retrieve the birds. The smell of hot gunmetal and acrid gunsmoke mixed with marsh grass and mud, all moving on winds off the Gulf of Mexico.

After weeks spent in front of TV and computer screens, it made me feel alive.

I have the hand-eye coordination of a tilapia and loathe waking up early, so hunting wasn't for me. I ended up making other memories with my dad.

But for many American men and women, hunting is a thing of primal tribal bonding. There are millions of young people whose hunting memories are the fondest and most vivid they have of their fathers, and sometimes their mothers.

I worry that too many city-dwellers have a mental image of guns painted by movies and TV shows. They don't recognize the cultural significance of hunting; if they think about it at all, it's as a barbaric anachronism.

Even for those who aren't hunters, we've got to acknowledge the appeal of guns as instruments of self-defense.

Is there any human instinct more powerful than the urge to protect family? Is it really hard to understand why a mother or father would want a weapon in their household, a tool to ferociously defend themselves and their kids?

More practically, gun control supporters could benefit from learning some basic facts and lingo on firearms.

Too many left-wing politicians drop the word "semi-automatic" like they're talking about artillery — "semi-automatic" simply means "the gun fires each time you pull the trigger," and it describes most modern guns.

What do unyielding gun control advocates want hunters to have? Muskets?

Some Democrats are up in arms over proposals to make suppressors more widely available. They call them "silencers," like something in a James Bond movie.

But anybody who's actually heard one in action knows how hilariously wrong the term "silencer" is — it's still a pretty big kaboom.

If gun control advocates were less illiterate about guns and more willing to acknowledge their appeal, they might have more credibility.

It is true that there are some gun reforms that ought not to worry gun owners. It seems almost everybody, including — reluctantly — the NRA, thinks we should do something about bump stocks, which turn semi-automatic guns into basically machine guns and contributed to the bloodbath in Las Vegas.

I'd go further: there are "assault-style" weapons that are grossly over the top for hunting or self-defense. Background checks and other safeguards, like the ones we put on drivers, could be implemented without unduly burdening responsible gun owners.

Too many defenders of gun rights are unwilling to concede even the most minimal changes to gun laws. They act as if reformers seek to repeal the Second Amendment or "take away our guns."

This is wrong. But these arguments would carry less weight if gun control advocates had a better knowledge of guns and significantly more empathy and understanding for why guns are so important to their owners.

As with most issues, our seemingly impassable ideological divides would be a whole lot narrower if we tried harder to look at the other side.